MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408409323 · doi:10.3390/healthcare13060621

Are Virtual Forests Just for Relaxation, or Can They Enhance the Benefits of Therapy?

2025· article· en· W4408409323 on OpenAlexafffund
You Zhi Hu, Max Beggs, Xue Yu, Junyoung Seok, Yan Xiao, Alex Mariakakis, Mark Chignell

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Therapy and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsAnxietyRelaxation (psychology)Intervention (counseling)PsychologyTherapeutic effectSocial anxietyVirtual realityPsychotherapistClinical psychologyApplied psychologyMedicineComputer scienceSocial psychologyHuman–computer interactionPsychiatryPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forest bathing (Shinrin-Yoku in Japanese) is used as an intervention for improving mental health, with VR being used to create virtual forests for relaxation. BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: In this research, we added therapeutic intent to a virtual forest with the goal of reducing social anxiety, with and without therapeutic instruction. METHODS: Fifty-eight first-year psychology students were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: virtual forest only, therapeutic exercises only, and both combined. RESULTS: All three conditions enhanced restorative effects equally. However, only the therapeutic exercise-only condition showed a tendency to reduce social anxiety. Participants in the combined condition reported more positive experiences and showed better comprehension of therapy content in the virtual forest. CONCLUSIONS: While the non-VR approach may offer immediate relaxation and possible anxiety reduction, combining the virtual forest with therapeutic exercises may yield better outcomes for sustained engagement and understanding over multiple therapeutic sessions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.097
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcareSame topicArt Therapy and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207